update_post

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. 'Update an existing post' reveals no operational traits such as whether it performs a partial or full update, which fields are affected, whether it requires authorization, or what happens on invalid input. This is a significant transparency gap for a mutation tool.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is only four words, which is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It front-loads the main action but fails to provide any accompanying context or detail that would justify such brevity. Every sentence should earn its place, but here valuable information is omitted entirely.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with 6 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is severely underwhelming. It does not explain the semantics of the parameters, the expected side effects, return format, or error conditions. The description is far too sparse to support safe and correct invocation by an AI agent.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate by explaining parameter roles. It does not mention text, label_ids, media_ids, account_ids, or scheduled_at, leaving the meaning of the six schema parameters entirely to the developer. The description adds no value beyond the schema's type definitions.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description 'Update an existing post' clearly states the specific action (update) and the target resource (existing post), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_post, delete_post, schedule_post, and publish_post_now. It is concise and unambiguous in identifying the tool's core function.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it should be used for editing existing posts rather than creating new ones, nor does it reference any excluded scenarios or preferred sibling tools. The only hint is the name itself.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.